Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Published in
SEL Journal of Reliable Power, Volume 3, Number 1, March 2012
Previously presented at
Waterpower XVI, July 2009
Abstract—The classical theory of representation of power In steady state, the current flowing in the rotor winding is
swings in the impedance plane is based on the representation of equal to the exciter voltage divided by the winding resistance:
synchronous generators as constant voltage sources. The classical
model of a synchronous generator represents the machine as a Vf
If = (2)
constant voltage source behind the transient reactance in the rf
direct axis. The classical model of synchronous generators is
based on the assumption that the rotor flux linkage will not The field winding has a self-inductance Lff. A fundamental
change during a short period of time following a major characteristic of a synchronous generator is the direct-axis
disturbance. In reality, with constant excitation voltage, the rotor open-circuit transient time constant T'd0, the ratio of the field
flux linkage will decrease and the internal generator voltage will self inductance over its dc resistance:
decrease accordingly. The addition of an automatic voltage
regulator (AVR) boosts the excitation voltage following a Lff
'
Td0 = (3)
disturbance so that the rotor flux linkage will be sustained and rf
the generator internal voltage will be prevented from collapsing.
The purpose of this paper is to show how power swing The order of magnitude of this time constant, which is
representation in the impedance plane will depart from the typically a few seconds, indicates that the voltage at the
classical theory when complex AVRs are used on modern synchronous generator terminals cannot be changed
generators. instantaneously; in other words, the current in the field
winding varies according to the field open-circuit time
I. BASIC SYNCHRONOUS GENERATOR PHYSICAL PRINCIPLES constant.
This paper is not intended to be an exhaustive review of When the generator is loaded, the three-phase currents will
synchronous generator physical and engineering principles, create a flux, represented in Fig. 2 as ψia+ib+ic. This flux is
but rather an overview of fundamental and essential facts. It is known as the armature reaction. The vectorial addition of the
assumed here that the reader is familiar with the two-axis field flux and the armature reaction is the air-gap flux, which
model representation of synchronous machines [1]. is represented as ψag.
Direct Quadrature
Axis ia Axis Direct Quadrature
Axis ia Axis
ψf
ψf ψ
ag
–ic Eq –ib
–ic –ib
If
Stator If
Phase ψ
Vf Windings ia + ib + ic
vf
ib ic
ib ic
–ia
–ia
Fig. 1. Synchronous generator basic mechanical and electrical structure
Fig. 2. Armature reaction
Fig. 1 represents a two-pole synchronous generator. The
The projection of the air-gap flux on the direct and
rotor winding is supplied with a dc exciter voltage Vf. A dc
quadrature axis, as in Fig. 3, defines the fluxes in the direct
current If flows in the rotor winding to create a flux ψf in the
and quadrature axes as ψd and ψq.
generator direct axis. When the primary mover drives the
The fluxes in the direct and quadrature axes create the
generator and the generator rotates at synchronous speed, the
corresponding voltages vd and va along the same axes. We can
flux will induce a voltage in the three-phase stator windings.
demonstrate [1] these voltages with:
When the generator is unloaded, we can measure an excitation
or generator internal voltage at the terminals. This internal dψ d
vd = ra i d + − ωψ q (4)
voltage, Eq in Fig. 1, is proportional to the current If and lies in dt
the quadrature axis 90 degrees ψf. Eq is given by (1). and
E q = ω M f If (1)
2
X'd
3.4
E'i Vt E = 3.5
3.2 ex
When we do not assume a constant flux linkage following Fig. 7. Eq variation with different excitation voltages Eex
a disturbance, the rate of change of the voltage proportional to
1.2
the rotor flux linkage is as in (15): a function of the exciter
voltage Eex, the excitation voltage Eq, and the generator rotor
1.1
open circuit transient time constant T′d0. Note that as the rotor
time constant T′d0 increases, the rate of change of E′q E = 3.5
ex
decreases. 1
E = 2.0
To illustrate the impact of exciter voltage Eex on Eq and E′q ex
following a disturbance close to the generator, consider the 0.9
example of an unloaded generator, with unit terminal voltage, E = 1.0
subjected to a three-phase short circuit at its terminals. The ex
0.8
generator impedances are as in (16):
X d = 1.15, X ′d = 0.37, X q = X ′q = 0.75 (16) 0.7
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Because the generator is unloaded, the identities in (17) are Time (s)
applicable prior to the short circuit:
Fig. 8. E′q variation with different excitation voltages Eex
Vt = E ex = E q = E ′q = 1.0
(17) C. The Notions of Synchronizing and Damping Torques
It = 0
Consider the simple network model of Fig. 9, where a
If we follow the methodology indicated in [1], Fig. 7 shows generator represented as a constant voltage source behind the
the variation in time of the excitation voltage Eq when the transient reactance supplies an infinite bus through an
short circuit is applied with different exciter voltages. At the impedance Xe. This generator model is the classical model of
moment the short circuit is applied, Eq will jump from 1.0 to a generator.
3.29 because of the fault current. Eq will then vary according
to the exciter voltage applied. In manual mode (Eex = 1.0), the X′d Vt Xe
excitation voltage will start dropping linearly. With a voltage
regulator, as the exciter voltage jumps to its ceiling value (see
Section II), the rate of change of the internal voltage drop XT
decreases. The figure shows the variation of Eq with two E i′ ∠ δ Es ∠ 0
regulator ceiling voltages: 2 and 3.5 pu. There exists a value
for the exciter voltage (slightly smaller than 3.5 pu for the
example) where the excitation system will sustain Eq. Above
this value, Eq will increase linearly during the short circuit.
Fig. 8 uses the same example during the three-phase short Fig. 9. Elementary power network with classical representation of generator
circuit to illustrate the variation of E′q. Following the We define the following:
application of the short circuit, E′q does not change, because of
∆Tm is the variation of the mechanical power input
the constant flux linkage principle. As for Eq, E′q will drop to the generator in per unit (pu).
linearly with low values of the exciter voltage Eex. For Eq,
there is a threshold value for Eex where E′q will remain H is the inertia constant in seconds.
unchanged during the short circuit. Above the threshold, E′q M is the inertia coefficient = 2H in seconds.
will start increasing linearly rather than decreasing.
This example illustrates the impact of an autoregulator on ω0
is the base rotor electrical speed in radians per
generator internal voltage during a disturbance. An auto- second (377 rad/s).
regulator can increase the generator internal voltages during a The control block diagram that Fig. 10 represents allows us
disturbance. This capacity is directly related to improving the to use the technique of small-signal analysis [2] [5] to study
generator transient stability, as this paper explains later. the dynamics of the elementary network in Fig. 9.
4
The total electrical torque that opposes the mechanical In automatic mode, a voltage set point is introduced in the
power input the synchronous machine produces is the sum of summing point of the AVR. The excitation system compares
two synchronous and damping torques and is equal to (18): this voltage set point to the generator output voltage
∆Te = ∆Tsync + ∆Tdamp = K1 ∆δ + K D ∆ω (18) measurement, and the comparison produces an error signal
that adjusts the timing of the firing of the silicon-controlled
The synchronous torque is proportional to the machine rectifiers until the output voltage Vt equals the voltage set
internal angle variation in (19): point. In steady state, the generator output voltage is therefore
∆Tsync = K1 ∆δ (19) equal to the voltage set point.
The damping torque is proportional to the machine speed
SCR Bridge
variation in (20):
Field PPT
∆Tdamp = K D ∆ω (20) Circuit Terminal
Voltage Vt
For the system in Fig. 9, we can demonstrate that K1 is
equal to (21) [2]: PT
E′ E
K1 = i s cos δ0 (21) – +
XT Manual
Regulator
Set Point If
VF KF
1 + s TF
KLR + IFD
V*UEL, V*OEL: Alternate Inputs –
0
ILR
Vfmax
F2 KUV VUEL to AVR
Terminal
KA F2 = (Et)k2 Summing
Vf 1 + sTUV
Voltage Vc – 1 + sTA et F2 = (Et)–k2 Point
+
Vfmin
PxF1 KUV
Phase P
1 + sTUV
Gain Washout Compensation
Fig. 15. Example of a type UEL2 straight line UEL
sTw 1 + sT1
∆ω R KPSS
1 + sTw 1 + sT2
Q
Xd, Xq Xe
KUV
KUP
P
Eq Vt Es
KUV (k1+k2) Fig. 17. Elementary generator system
Vt
KUQ KUP
slope =
KUQ
j (Xd–X′d) Id
Iq j x′d It E′q=E′ Eq
Fig. 16. Type UEL2 straight line characteristic
limits (manual and AVR). The SSSL has, therefore, We can simplify the equation further by removing the
been substantially improved. saliency and replacing E′q with E′i so that we get:
3 E i′ E s
P= sin δ (26)
Vt = 1.0 Xd = 1.6 Xq = 1.55 Xd' = 0.32 X ′d + X e
Xe = 0.4 Te = 0.05 H = 3 T'd0 = 6
As an example, consider the case of a generator operated at
Kstab = 5 Tw = 1.45 T1 = 0.4 T2 = 0.033 unit terminal voltage and unit current with a power factor of
2
0.91. Equation (27) shows the generator impedances in pu
values:
Unit Circle
X d = 1.15, X ′d = 0.37, x q = X ′q = 0.75 (27)
Equation (28) shows the external impedance:
1 X e = 0.2 (28)
For this condition of operation, we can compute the
Q (pu)
Fig. 21. Generator power angle curves in steady and transient states
8
IV. CLASSICAL SWING IMPEDANCE CHARACTERISTIC However, if the excitation system is an AVR, the excitation
will sustain, and may boost, the generator internal voltage so
A. Classical Model of Generators
that ratio n becomes greater than one. The change of the
The classical swing impedance theory determines the generator internal voltage depends upon the AVR
impedance trajectory in the complex plane when the generator characteristics: a slow-acting AVR could limit the rise of the
is represented as a constant voltage source, the angle of which internal voltage, but a fast-acting AVR could contribute to a
varies with respect to an infinite bus (Fig. 22). This model of a rapid buildup of the internal voltage [3]. After the internal
generator is the same as the classical model shown in Fig. 9. voltage builds up and ratio n becomes greater than one, the
In Fig. 22, we assumed that Xtr between the generator and the trajectory circles will move to the upper part of the impedance
infinite bus represents the impedance of the step-up plane, with the circles decreasing as n increases (as shown in
transformer and that Ze corresponds to the series impedance of Fig. 24).
a transmission line.
X
X′d Vt Xtr Ze
B
Electrical
Ze Center
ZT δ = 180°
E′i∠δ Es∠0
ZT
E′j > Es
Xtr
The generator used in the Real Time Digital Simulator A. Examples of Swings With Manual Excitation.
(RTDS®) represents a set of 4 x 555 MVA generators (in the In the first case, the fault is cleared after 85 ms and the line
model, we consider them as a single 2220 MVA generator). reclosed after 500 ms. The system remains stable. Fig. 27
Fig. 25 is a high-level representation of how the generator shows the voltages and currents as measured by a protection
excitation system will be controlled in the RTDS. device in Line 2.
Man
Gen VGT
TM
Man Ef
VGT
AVR
If
AVR = Auto
ω PSS 1
2
0
PSS = Y
Line 1
Fig. 30. Response of the generator speed, active power, and reactive power
outputs before, during, and after the applied fault
Fig. 32. The voltage and current profile for the three-phase fault whereby
the faulted line is reclosed after 1 second (unstable swing case)
Fig. 35. A plot of the positive-sequence impedance magnitude for the case
when the generator becomes unstable
Fig. 36. Plot of the generator speed, active power, and reactive power when
the generator experiences an unstable power swing
12
Fig. 40 is the response of the generator for the applied Fig. 41 shows the response of the AVR. The three-phase
conditions. Initially, the speed, active power, and reactive fault on the line reduces the terminal voltage to near zero
power are at a constant level (prefault condition). During the during this fault, and the AVR tries to compensate for the low
fault, the machine speed increases. This is to be expected terminal voltage by boosting the generator internal voltage
because the amount of electrical active power the generator (Ei). During the fault, the AVR reaches the voltage maximum
exports is not the same as the amount of mechanical power it limit (see Fig. 12).
imports. Also, during the fault the active power export
decreases and the reactive power export increases, which
agrees with the theory. Once the fault clears, the machine
speed begins to stabilize and the machine begins to export
more active power (MWs) than it did during the prefault
condition. This is because the machine has stored up kinetic
energy in the rotor during the fault, energy that is now also
being exported to the power system. Because the machine is
exporting more electrical power than it is receiving
mechanical power, the rotor speed begins to decrease as the
generator uses up the stored kinetic energy. Up to this point
Fig. 41. Output of the AVR
(±27 cycles after fault clearance [450 ms]), the machine
behaves almost identically for the manually excited and the This boost in internal voltage helps maintain generator
automatically excited case. Moving forward, however, stability during the time the faulted line breaker is open,
differences begin to appear. In the manually excited case, the allowing the generator to export the same amount of active
generator active power export begins to decrease, which power as the amount of mechanical power it imports. As
results in increasing speed. This downward spiral continues mentioned before, the current the generator exports for the
until the machine slips a pole and becomes unstable. The first 27 cycles after the fault is cleared is almost similar for
instability occurs because the increased voltage drop inside the both cases (see Fig. 42), but after this point, the manually
generator collapses the terminal voltage, preventing the excited generator current continues to increase because the
generator from exporting the electrical active power that it is machine is trying to export real power. So, even though
receiving in the form of mechanical energy. When the AVR is reactive power is linked to voltage, voltage is necessary to
enabled, it keeps the terminal voltage at a more or less export active power from a generator. Thus, the boost in
constant level after the fault is cleared. internal voltage resulting from the AVR gives the generator
the synchronizing torque to maintain synchronism with the
system.
Fig. 40. A plot of the generator speed, active power, and reactive power for
the case where the AVR is enabled Fig. 42. A comparison of the line current in the unfaulted lines for the case
with and without the AVR enabled
From Fig. 40, we can see that the generator does not settle
back to its prefault condition rapidly after the fault is cleared.
As mentioned before, the generator achieves its prefault state
after about 15 seconds.
14
C. Examples of Swings With AVR and PSS Enabled If we enlarge Fig. 44, we see that the impedance variation
For this third and final case, both the AVR and the PSS after each swing decreases more (see Fig. 45) than for the case
will be enabled, and we will subject the system to the same with only the AVR. The plot in Fig. 45 occurs over the same
condition as previously mentioned. Fig. 43 is a voltage and time frame, 3 seconds or 180 cycles, as the one in Fig. 38.
current plot for the applied fault and the reclose. From this plot, we can clearly see the effect of the PSS. The
PSS results in the impedance returning more rapidly to its
prefault state.
Fig. 43. A plot of the voltage and current with the AVR and PSS in service
Fig. 46. A plot of the positive-sequence impedance magnitude for the case
where AVR and PSS are enabled
VI. CONCLUSIONS
1. For short-circuit studies, where only the fault current
magnitude is of concern, we can use a constant voltage
source instead of a complete generator model, reducing
the complexity of the system model.
2. Generators with manual excitation experience a decrease
of the generator internal voltage (Ei) following a system
disturbance, such as a fault, close to the generator
terminals. This decrease in internal voltage significantly
reduces the generator’s synchronizing ability after the
disturbance.
3. An AVR significantly improves generator steady-state
stability, provided that the gain of the AVR is limited and
that the AVR is not operating at its limits before the
disturbance. The AVR boosts the generator internal
voltage during a system disturbance; this boost increases
Fig. 47. A plot of the machine speed, active power, and reactive power the generator synchronizing torque, allowing the
when the AVR and PSS are both enabled generator to return to synchronism after the disturbance.
Fig. 48 shows the output of the PSS and the AVR for the 4. An AVR will help increase the synchronizing torque of a
above condition. At fault inception, the machine initially loses generator but will reduce the damping torque. Because of
speed and then gains speed. This initial drop in speed results this, the AVR gain will have to be limited in most cases.
in the PSS issuing a negative gain in the excitation. After this 5. A PSS increases the damping torque of a generator and
initial decrease in speed, the machine speed increases and the allows increasing the AVR gain without compromising
PSS and AVR both drive the AVR to its upper limit. It is the generator’s dynamic stability. A PSS therefore
interesting that the PSS causes the AVR to be driven to the improves the dynamic stability of the generator more than
upper and lower limits more often than when only the AVR is an AVR alone.
enabled. This occurs because the PSS wants to drive the 6. In transient stability studies, generators modeled with
change in speed of the machine to zero. constant excitation will constitute the worst-case scenario
with respect to system stability following a disturbance.
AVRs and PSSs in the generators should substantially
improve system stability.
Fig. 50. Per unit conversion between excitation system and synchronous
machine
The following sketch illustrates how to move from the non- Now let us revisit some generator flux equations:
reciprocal system to the reciprocal system and vice versa. ψ d = M f • I′f − L d • i d (38a)
If we now wrap all of this into a phasor diagram, we get the [10] ANSI Standard C50.13-1989, Requirements for Cylindrical Rotor
following: Synchronous Generators, 1989.
[11] ANSI Standard C50.12-1982, Standard for Requirements for Salient-
(xd – xd′)Id Pole Synchronous Generators and Generator/Motors for Hydraulic
Turbine Applications, 1982.
E
Ed [12] R. Sandoval, A. Guzmán, and H. J. Altuve, “Dynamic Simulations Help
Quadrature Improve Generator Protection,” proceedings of the 33rd Annual Western
Iq Eq′ Eq Axis
Protective Relay Conference, Spokane, WA, October 2006.
δ
Ed′ E′ xqIq
xd′Id X. BIOGRAPHY
Φ xq′Iq Ei′
Vt xd′I Normann Fischer received a Higher Diploma in Technology, with honors,
rI xdId from Witwatersrand Technikon, Johannesburg in 1988, a B.S.E.E., with
honors, from the University of Cape Town in 1993, and an M.S.E.E. from the
Id I University of Idaho in 2005. He joined Eskom as a protection technician in
1984 and was a senior design engineer in Eskom’s Protection Design
Direct Department for three years. He then joined IST Energy as a senior design
Axis engineer in 1996. In 1999, he joined Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories,
Inc. as a power engineer in the Research and Development Division. He was a
Fig. 52. Phasor diagram of a synchronous machine during the transient state registered professional engineer in South Africa and a member of the South
Africa Institute of Electrical Engineers.
IX. REFERENCES
[1] E. W. Kimbark, Power System Stability: Synchronous Machines, Dover Gabriel Benmouyal, P.E. received his B.A.S. in Electrical Engineering and
his M.A.S. in Control Engineering from Ecole Polytechnique, Université de
Publications, Inc., New York.
Montréal, Canada, in 1968 and 1970, respectively. In 1969, he joined Hydro-
[2] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control, New York: McGraw- Québec as an Instrumentation and Control Specialist. He worked on different
Hill, 1994. projects in the field of substation control systems and dispatching centers. In
[3] G. Benmouyal, “The Impact of Synchronous Generators Excitation 1978, he joined IREQ, where his main field of activity was the application of
Supply on Protection and Relays,” proceedings of the 34th Annual microprocessors and digital techniques for substation and generating-station
Western Protective Relay Conference, Spokane, WA, October 2007. control and protection systems. In 1997, he joined Schweitzer Engineering
Laboratories, Inc. in the position of Principal Research Engineer. He is a
[4] IEEE Standard 421.5-1992, IEEE Recommended Practice for Excitation
registered professional engineer in the Province of Québec, an IEEE Senior
System Models for Power System Stability Studies, 1992.
Member, and he has served on the Power System Relaying Committee since
[5] F. P. DeMello and C. Concordia, “Concepts of Synchronous Machine May 1989. He holds over six patents and is the author or coauthor of several
Stability as Affected by Excitation Control,” IEEE Transactions on papers in the field of signal processing and power networks protection and
Energy Conversion, Vol. PAS−88, No. 4, pp. 316−329, April 1969. control.
[6] IEEE Task Force on Excitation Limiters, “Underexcitation Limiter
Model for Power System Stability Studies,” IEEE Transactions on Satish Samineni received his B.E. degree in electrical and electronics
Energy Conversion, Vol. 10, No. 3, September 1995. engineering from Andhra University College of Engineering, Visakhapatnam,
[7] D. Reimert, Protective Relaying for Power Generation Systems, Boca India. He received his Master’s degree in Electrical Engineering from the
Raton: CRC Press, 2006. University of Idaho in 2003. Since 2003, he has been with Schweitzer
Engineering Laboratories, Inc. in Pullman, Washington, where he presently is
[8] IEEE Power Engineering Society, IEEE Tutorial on the Protection of a Lead Power Engineer. His research interests include power electronics and
Synchronous Generators, 95 TP 102. drives, power system protection, synchrophasor-based control applications,
[9] IEEE Standard C37.102/D7−200X, Guide for AC Generator Protection, and power system stability.
April 2006.